DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Ehcache vs. MySQL vs. YottaDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Ehcache vs. MySQL vs. YottaDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Widely used open source RDBMS

A fast and solid embedded Key-value store

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Relational DBMS

using the Octo plugin

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	4.79
Rank	#66	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.21
Rank	#309	Overall
	#43	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.ehcache.org

www.mysql.com

yottadb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.ehcache.org/documentation

dev.mysql.com/doc

yottadb.com/resources/documentation

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

YottaDB, LLC

Initial release

2012

2009

1995

2001

Current release

3.10.0, March 2022

9.0.0, July 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

AGPL 3.0

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Docker
Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

yes

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

with proprietary extensions

by using the Octo plugin

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JCache

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

PostgreSQL wire protocol

using the Octo plugin
Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Java

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
M
Perl
Python
Rust

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by using Terracotta Server

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

optimistic locking

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Users and groups based on OS-security mechanisms

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.